Skip to main content
Glama
KyaniteLabs

kinocut

by KyaniteLabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

video_layout_pip

Overlay a smaller video onto a main video as picture-in-picture with configurable position, size, margin, border, and rounded corners.

Instructions

Picture-in-picture overlay.

Overlay a smaller video on top of a main video.

Args: main_path: Absolute path to main video. pip_path: Absolute path to picture-in-picture video. output_path: Absolute path for output video. position: Position (top-left, top-right, bottom-left, bottom-right). Default bottom-right. size: PIP size as fraction of main. Default 0.25. margin: Margin from edges in pixels. Default 20. border: Add border around PIP. Default true. border_color: Border color hex. Default #CCFF00. border_width: Border width in pixels. Default 2. rounded_corners: Apply rounded corners to PIP. Default true.

Returns: Dict with success status and output_path.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sizeNo
borderNo
marginNo
pip_pathYes
positionNobottom-right
main_pathYes
overwriteNoExplicitly allow replacing existing media. Existing non-media files are protected.
output_pathYes
border_colorNo#CCFF00
border_widthNo
rounded_cornersNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.16.4
    • addedInput schema / properties / overwrite
      Added value: +{
+  "default": false,
+  "description": "Explicitly allow replacing existing media. Existing non-media files are protected.",
+  "title": "Overwrite",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changedv1.16.0
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  3. Addedv1.5.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It states the return value and lists parameter defaults, but it does not explain overwrite protection, source-file requirements, failure behavior, whether inputs are modified, or permission constraints for this media-processing mutation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The purpose is front-loaded, and the Args/Returns docstring structure is appropriate for an 11-parameter video tool. There is minor redundancy between the title-like first line and the second sentence, but otherwise the description is efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity and the existing output schema, the description provides enough parameter detail for an agent to invoke it correctly. It is less complete for tool selection and overwrite behavior, but return values need not be expanded because an output schema exists.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is only 9%, so the description must compensate heavily. It explains nearly every parameter beyond the schema: absolute paths for main, PIP, and output; allowed position values; size as a fraction; margin and border dimensions; and border/rounded-corner defaults. The only omitted parameter is overwrite, which the schema itself documents.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: overlaying a smaller video on a main video as picture-in-picture. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not distinguish itself from related siblings such as video_overlay, video_composite_layers, video_split_screen, or video_layout_grid.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The opening lines imply the tool should be used when a picture-in-picture effect is needed. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no routing to alternative overlay or composite tools, so the agent must infer selection criteria.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools